25 U.S.C. § 891
Repealed. Pub. L. 93–197, § 3(b), Dec. 22, 1973, 87 Stat. 770
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1968–2026 · leading case: Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. United States
Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. United States (1972)
“§ 677h, applies only where there has been consent by the authorized representatives of the mixed-blood group which was necessarily absent because of the defect in the creation of the Ute Distribution Corp. NOTES [1] The Act was one of a series of termination statutes enacted…”
Menominee Tribe of Indians v. United States (1968)
“25 U. S. C. § 891 . (Emphasis added.) The Federal Government ceded to the State of Wisconsin its power of supervision over the tribe and the reservation lands, as evident from the provision of the Termination Act that the laws of Wisconsin "shall apply to the tribe and its…”
Santa Rosa Band of Indians v. Kings County (1976)
“The statute was passed in pari materia with the Menominee Termination Act, 25 U.S.C. § 891 et seq., and the Klamath Termination Act, 25 U.”
Menominee Tribe of Indians v. United States (1979)
“25 U.S.C. § 891 (1970). It is hard to see in that routine descriptive phrase any directive to the Secretary above and beyond the specific duties placed upon him by the subsequent sections of the legislation (or the Constitution, or other legislation).”
State v. Forge (1977)
“2d 697 (1968), the United States Supreme Court held that the Menominee Tribe of Indians retained their right to hunt and fish notwithstanding the fact that the Menominee Indian Termination Act of 1954, 25 U.S.C.A. § 891 to § 911, had terminated their reservation.”
United States v. Jackie White (1975)
“It found the act was only intended to “provide for the ‘orderly termination of Federal supervision over the property and members’ ” of the tribe and that it contained absolutely no mention of hunting or fishing rights.”
John Mark Latender v. Thomas Israel, Warden (1978)
“” Former 25 U.S.C. § 891 . The Act provided for transfer of the Menominees’ assets, then held in federal trust, to a newly formed corporation to be controlled by the Menominees.”
Catawba Indian Tribe v. South Carolina (1983)
“) The Federal Government ceded to the State of Wisconsin its power of supervision over the tribe and the reservation lands, as evident from the provision of the Termination Act that the laws of Wisconsin “shall apply to the tribe and its members in the same manner as they apply…”
In Re Nacotee for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (1975)
“25 U.S.C. § 891 . The Federal Government ceded to the State of Wisconsin its power of supervision over the tribe and the reservation lands, as evident from the provision of the Termination Act that the laws of Wisconsin ‘shall apply to the tribe and its members in the same…”
Legend Lake Property Owners Association, Inc. v. Guy Keshena (2026)
“250 (1954) (formerly codified at 25 U.S.C. §§ 891–902) [hereinafter Termination Act].”
United States v. Long (2002)
“25 U.S.C. § 891 (1954). And the Restoration Act, unlike the 1990 amendments to the ICRA, 25 U.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.